User:Taylorjackson0911/Corporate social media/SamanthaSabatiniYCP Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? (provide username) TaylorJackson0911
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Taylorjackson0911/sandbox

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes, in the sandbox there is a few more sentences that are going to be added to the lead.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, the lead of the article does provide a clear explanation of what corporate social media is.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Currently, the wikipedia article itself does not include a brief description of all the article's major sections but what Taylor is going to add to the introduction (written in their sandbox) is going to touch briefly upon the benefits and risks of CSM which will then balance out the lead. Two things I would note is the last sentence of the intended edits needs to be revised a little bit to make sense. "This big push to move to Social Media to create a better experience with the consumers." Also, I'm not sure if you should say "Marketers also need to understand" because that seems to have a bit of an opinion to it. I would suggest maybe revising the wording of it to have it sound more neutral.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? I think the lead gives a good overview and helps me understand easily what CSM is as someone who hasn't ever read about it before.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes, the content added definitely expands information on the topic.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes, the content added is up-to-date and comes from within the last 10 years.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No, I don't see anything that is missing or doesn't belong.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? Yes, overall it is neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, there is not any of that.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No, I think the benefits and risks are balanced. Maybe more information could be added to both sections though if possible.
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? I see APA citations for sources that were paraphrased, but I don't see the link to the actual article or any footnote numbers in their sandbox draft.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes.
 * Are the sources current? Yes 2010 and 2015.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? No links are provided in the sandbox.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, the chart is a great visual addition and adds a lot of important information social medias that corporations use. Only thing I would suggest (not sure if we have to do this for our assignment or not) but you could hyperlink the wikipedia pages to the social medias listed in the Examples section of the chart. Just so if users want more information.
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Yes, I would say there are some minor revisions that need to be in accordance with sentence structures.
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, each section is expanded upon more.

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? The only image would be a chart that presents the information in a more organized and concise way.
 * Are images well-captioned? n/a
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? n/a
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? n/a

For New Articles Only
If the draft you're reviewing is a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.


 * Does the article meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements - i.e. Is the article supported by 2-3 reliable secondary sources independent of the subject?
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * Does the article follow the patterns of other similar articles - i.e. contain any necessary infoboxes, section headings, and any other features contained within similar articles?
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?